This was actually a reply to a question angorian asked in comments to this post, but it became too insanely long, so now it's a post of its own
( Read more... )
Also, the more a character is praised by other characters, the less I'll like them. How I hate this! Perhaps it's because I'm used to seeing it with genuine Mary Sues in fic, it absolutely ruins a character for me. I loved geeky, mad, survivalist Fred, but the second everyone was in lurve with her, I switched off, and later actively hated her presence. I seem to be one of the few people that didn't like Wesley once he got competent, though. My favourite arcs for Wesley involve shame (his relationship with Lilah) or failure (his Watcher-Slayer relationship with Faith) or betrayal (taking Connor). When he's good at anything non-researchy, he's dull. I liked to see him try.
I find Wesley rather tragic, because seen over the season, his repeated arc is building a space for himself, only to be knocked out of it, over and over again. Yes, this is something that happens to all characters on the show, but him more than anyone, it seemed to me. So I kind of liked seeing him in a "safe spot" because it always felt like he deserved a bit of rest between the humiliations.
Put that way it makes sense - I didn't want to see him humiliated, really, so much as deal with his discomfort and personal feelings. I suppose "Wesley developing competence" is more interesting to me than "Wesley is competent" - which is unusual for me, because I usually really like characters who do their jobs well (Kaylee, Wash, Giles, the entire crew of the Enterprise). Perhaps it's because his job is so ill-defined that it's too easy to swerve from "total incompetence" to "ridiculous over-competence".
(I just went and wasted an hour on tv tropes, which I had forgotten about, but which I should have remembered was dangerous)
It's really, really addictive, isn't it?
Jane is also my favourite on Coupling. Most people prefer Jeff, but I love Jane because she's not inept so much as living in a slightly different world than everyone else.
Yeah, she's just so outrageous, and hardly ever even gets embarrassed. :-) It was a bit undercut in season 4, I think, but OTOH I liked her with Oliver too, so I'm not complaining.
I think what I didn't like about Spike on Angel was that their rivalry wasn't really taken seriously. The Girl in Question episode for example was totally lame.
That wasn't a very good episode, no. I think the reason Spike really worked for me on Angel was because he provided the voice of ridicule, which the Angel crew sorely needed and hadn't had for way too long.
With regard to Xander being a jerk when in love ... there was always an undercurrent of that. He was very selfishly motivated and sorta evil when it came to
( ... )
TV Tropes sucks me back in every couple of months, after I forget how much I hate their Heroes page (come on, they make it sound like Mohinder and Noah are the main characters!) and the way they reference Star Wars. Because I'm still sensitive beyond reason on that topic.
I hear ya on overly praised characters in canon being a turn off. Usually that's just a sign of weak writing in general, so I'm not sure I can really distinguish that as a reason to dislike a character. I'm actually a big fan of sidekicks who choose to be there and characters who are all around failures. Especially if combined with an attempted redemption arc. Mmm. There's a reason Wesley, Faith, and Anakin Skywalker are among my favorites.
And I hate self-hating geeks. Argh, probably the most frustrating character type ever. Luckily they are getting far less common these days. I mean, on both Reaper and Chuck the geekiness is posited as an asset, and Hiro's geekiness is half of his charm (though they are slowly injecting some realism into his comic booky
( ... )
TV Tropes sucks me back in every couple of months, after I forget how much I hate their Heroes page (come on, they make it sound like Mohinder and Noah are the main characters!) and the way they reference Star Wars. Because I'm still sensitive beyond reason on that topic.
I hadn't read those pages, thanks for the warning! I started loving it when I realized that the Moff has his own trope, and then I just got sucked in. I'll never be able to think of some of those tropes without using their names now!
I hear ya on overly praised characters in canon being a turn off. Usually that's just a sign of weak writing in general, so I'm not sure I can really distinguish that as a reason to dislike a character.
It's highly common, though. There are variations - the Big Destiny is one (okay, so this character has to save the world, it can't be someone else), as is the inexplicable love triangle/rectangle/more (to quote 10 things: "What is it with this chick? She have beer-flavored nipples?") and the general lack of criticism - minor characters
( ... )
I started loving it when I realized that the Moff has his own trope
Oh, Jeffery!
There are variations - the Big Destiny is one (okay, so this character has to save the world, it can't be someone else)
That one I'm actually very fond of, although that has to do more with my love of time travel and prophecy tales rather than the idea of singling a character out and making him or her special. But I'm a genre fan who typically likes the main character, so I obviously give them a pass on this one.
and the general lack of criticism - minor characters are much more likely to be called out when they're doing something stupid or repulsive.
Or, on top of this, being called "the best of all of us" with no legitimate reasoning behind either the characters thinking that, or the writer thinking that. Even semi-liking Willow back in S3, that line still ticked me off. Why in the world would Giles or Buffy think that? Xander, sure, but the other two don't make any sense.
Hiro still gets poked fun at to a certain degree, but he's not entirely
( ... )
That one I'm actually very fond of, although that has to do more with my love of time travel and prophecy tales rather than the idea of singling a character out and making him or her special. But I'm a genre fan who typically likes the main character, so I obviously give them a pass on this one.
Yeah, I'm not saying it's BADWRONG, just that it doesn't appeal to me, and because it doesn't appeal to me I tend to navigate towards the sidekicks. Though I suppose there can be sidekicks with destinies. *Tries to recall sidekick with destiny.*
Or, on top of this, being called "the best of all of us" with no legitimate reasoning behind either the characters thinking that, or the writer thinking that.
I'm not fond of "Show, don't tell" as a general rule, but in this case it's most certainly warranted. It's so incredibly common. "This character is smart like whoah. Which is proved by... look, he just IS, okay?"
I find that all of the shows I've ended up liking this year are slow builds. I fell for both Reaper and Pushing Daises from the
( ... )
I think the thing about sidekicks is the fact that they could leave at any minute. But choose not to walk away (most of the times. Like Ando or Samwise or Spike.) Also, they're less burdened than the main hero. Sometimes the feeling i get from writers is that OOOOH LET'S WRITE A HERO, he must be like this and this and that and they have this whole set of specifications about what should make him/her tick; and that just doesn't leave enough margin...to fool around. You know? Sidekicks are freer in their writing on occasion. I think, at least. (though I'm a dramaqueen, so I like heroes and sidekicks equally. :) )
I think the thing about sidekicks is the fact that they could leave at any minute. But choose not to walk away (most of the times. Like Ando or Samwise or Spike.)
Yeah, it's very brave of them. And sometimes they're not brave and they do walk away, so it's less predictable. Also, there's this feeling I have that in a situation like that, I wouldn't be the hero. Like how I love Eustace best of the Narnia kids, because I've gone scouting and I know from that experience that if I was thrown into an outer-world ocean I'd be whining and seasick and want to go home too. No sense of adventure, me. :-)
Sidekicks are freer in their writing on occasion.
There are stereotypes for sidekicks too, but yeah, it's easier to break out of the mold a little.
Comments 15
Marry me!
No wait I'm old. Marry my offspring!
Reply
Reply
How I hate this! Perhaps it's because I'm used to seeing it with genuine Mary Sues in fic, it absolutely ruins a character for me. I loved geeky, mad, survivalist Fred, but the second everyone was in lurve with her, I switched off, and later actively hated her presence. I seem to be one of the few people that didn't like Wesley once he got competent, though. My favourite arcs for Wesley involve shame (his relationship with Lilah) or failure (his Watcher-Slayer relationship with Faith) or betrayal (taking Connor). When he's good at anything non-researchy, he's dull. I liked to see him try.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
It's really, really addictive, isn't it?
Jane is also my favourite on Coupling. Most people prefer Jeff, but I love Jane because she's not inept so much as living in a slightly different world than everyone else.
Yeah, she's just so outrageous, and hardly ever even gets embarrassed. :-) It was a bit undercut in season 4, I think, but OTOH I liked her with Oliver too, so I'm not complaining.
I think what I didn't like about Spike on Angel was that their rivalry wasn't really taken seriously. The Girl in Question episode for example was totally lame.
That wasn't a very good episode, no. I think the reason Spike really worked for me on Angel was because he provided the voice of ridicule, which the Angel crew sorely needed and hadn't had for way too long.
With regard to Xander being a jerk when in love ... there was always an undercurrent of that. He was very selfishly motivated and sorta evil when it came to ( ... )
Reply
I hear ya on overly praised characters in canon being a turn off. Usually that's just a sign of weak writing in general, so I'm not sure I can really distinguish that as a reason to dislike a character. I'm actually a big fan of sidekicks who choose to be there and characters who are all around failures. Especially if combined with an attempted redemption arc. Mmm. There's a reason Wesley, Faith, and Anakin Skywalker are among my favorites.
And I hate self-hating geeks. Argh, probably the most frustrating character type ever. Luckily they are getting far less common these days. I mean, on both Reaper and Chuck the geekiness is posited as an asset, and Hiro's geekiness is half of his charm (though they are slowly injecting some realism into his comic booky ( ... )
Reply
I hadn't read those pages, thanks for the warning! I started loving it when I realized that the Moff has his own trope, and then I just got sucked in. I'll never be able to think of some of those tropes without using their names now!
I hear ya on overly praised characters in canon being a turn off. Usually that's just a sign of weak writing in general, so I'm not sure I can really distinguish that as a reason to dislike a character.
It's highly common, though. There are variations - the Big Destiny is one (okay, so this character has to save the world, it can't be someone else), as is the inexplicable love triangle/rectangle/more (to quote 10 things: "What is it with this chick? She have beer-flavored nipples?") and the general lack of criticism - minor characters ( ... )
Reply
Oh, Jeffery!
There are variations - the Big Destiny is one (okay, so this character has to save the world, it can't be someone else)
That one I'm actually very fond of, although that has to do more with my love of time travel and prophecy tales rather than the idea of singling a character out and making him or her special. But I'm a genre fan who typically likes the main character, so I obviously give them a pass on this one.
and the general lack of criticism - minor characters are much more likely to be called out when they're doing something stupid or repulsive.
Or, on top of this, being called "the best of all of us" with no legitimate reasoning behind either the characters thinking that, or the writer thinking that. Even semi-liking Willow back in S3, that line still ticked me off. Why in the world would Giles or Buffy think that? Xander, sure, but the other two don't make any sense.
Hiro still gets poked fun at to a certain degree, but he's not entirely ( ... )
Reply
Yeah, I'm not saying it's BADWRONG, just that it doesn't appeal to me, and because it doesn't appeal to me I tend to navigate towards the sidekicks. Though I suppose there can be sidekicks with destinies. *Tries to recall sidekick with destiny.*
Or, on top of this, being called "the best of all of us" with no legitimate reasoning behind either the characters thinking that, or the writer thinking that.
I'm not fond of "Show, don't tell" as a general rule, but in this case it's most certainly warranted. It's so incredibly common. "This character is smart like whoah. Which is proved by... look, he just IS, okay?"
I find that all of the shows I've ended up liking this year are slow builds. I fell for both Reaper and Pushing Daises from the ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Yeah, it's very brave of them. And sometimes they're not brave and they do walk away, so it's less predictable. Also, there's this feeling I have that in a situation like that, I wouldn't be the hero. Like how I love Eustace best of the Narnia kids, because I've gone scouting and I know from that experience that if I was thrown into an outer-world ocean I'd be whining and seasick and want to go home too. No sense of adventure, me. :-)
Sidekicks are freer in their writing on occasion.
There are stereotypes for sidekicks too, but yeah, it's easier to break out of the mold a little.
Reply
Leave a comment